Mast Sanity - Mast Network

Dienstag, 21. November 2006

Petition the Prime Minister to acknowledge the many peer reviewed studies that show adverse health effects from exposure to microwave radiation

https://petitions.pm.gov.uk/PhoneMasts/

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to acknowledge the many peer reviewed studies that show adverse health effects from exposure to microwave radiation from mobile phone handsets, base stations (masts) and wireless technology (WiFi, WIMAX, Tetra, DECT phones, etc.) through mechanisms independent of heating, and at levels much lower than currently considered safe by the government, and that there is no research or evidence which has proved their short or long term safety. We further call on the government to put safeguards in place, that acknowledge this evidence, to ensure that no person will be harmed due to exposure to this radiation, and to remove all mobile phone base stations (masts) that are within 500 metres of schools, homes and hospitals until these safeguards are in place.

Submitted by Simon Densley of Mast Sanity – Deadline to sign up by: 21 November 2007

Montag, 20. November 2006

Health fears lead schools to dismantle wireless networks

https://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2461748,00.html
Update:
https://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2461748.html

-------

WiFi in Schools

From: SylviaWright
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 03:55:52 EST
To: letters@thetimes.co.uk

Dear Sirs

I must congratulate Joanna Bale for her excellent article in The Times today on the potential health risk of wireless networking in our schools. This is a concern I have long held and have attempted to raise awareness of locally (South Staffordshire). I fear that our young people are being exploited by the mobile phone industry, but it becomes far more worrying when Local Authorities - who are ultimately responsible for the welfare of our children while they are in school - are ignoring official advice that children under 16 should not be exposed for long periods to the pulsed electromagnetic radiation from such devices - and let's be clear on this, it is the same technology used for WiFi as in mobile phones and cordless home phones (another very worrying trend).

It is quite ironic that urgent action is being taken to limit the targetting of our children by commercial enterprises (such as the junk food industry), but we are quite happily replacing any benefit from these measures with another risk, potentially much more harmful. Our young people are, in many cases, being exposed to high levels of emr 24/7 - both in the home and at school...Independent scientific studies have shown that such exposure - as well as posing a health risk - can have a detrimental impact on the mood, behaviour and mental state. In fact, Alasdair Phillips, Director of Powerwatch, has written a comprehensive letter advising schools to use wired networking, and the Director of Public Health for Salzburg, Dr Gerd Oberfeld, has written an open letter of warning on the subject.

Again, well done to Joanna & The Times, I hope that more schools will decide to take the precautionary approach much championed by Sir William Stewart.

Regards
Cllr Sylvia Wright

--------

From: Dr Grahame Blackwell
To: letters@thetimes.co.uk
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 11:00 PM
Subject: WiFi in schools (Times 201106)

Dear Editor

An A-star for Joanna Bale's excellent impartial report on Wireless netwoks in schools (times 20th November). Sadly, though, E-minus for your so-called Health Editor's facile and heavily-loaded comment. Informed parents have every reason to be concerned about WiFi in schools. Ms Davies was right to liken it to having a mobile phone mast in the classroom, the technologies are remarkably similar. Peer-reviewed replicated research shows reduction in melatonin production by those exposed to periodic amplitude modulated (pulsed) radiation of this sort. Melatonin is a sleep regulator and anti-cancer scavenger. Guess what? - Statistically significant increases in cancers around mast installations according to several independent studies, and sleep problems experienced by many living close to masts. Other research shows this type of radiation allows transfer of toxins from the bloodstream into brain cells. This would lead to significant increases in headaches, nausea, dizziness and disorientation around masts, and in the longer term significant increases in occurrence of brain degenerative disorders such as Alzheimers and Motor Neurone Disease. Guess what? - I'll leave you to fill in this gap. Two years ago a four-year EU funded research project involving twelve partner institutions from seven countries reported multiply replicated results of single- and double-strand breaks in DNA chains, of the sort that lead to cancer, as a result of this type of radiation at levels within our government's 'safety' guidelines. They stated categorically that it was no longer possible to say that we don't know how this sort of radiation could cause health problems. Nigel Hawkes likens this radiation to that of radio and TV. I suggest he carries out a short experiment, starting with resting a jack-hammer (switched off, of course) on his foot. No problems. Now start the jack-hammer up, still resting on that foot. By the laws of physics it can't be any heavier when running than when switched off - so there's no risk. That's the difference between radio and TV signals and mobile telecomms signals, including WiFi - except that the jack-hammer is aimed at every cell in the body, notably at brain cells. Mr Hawkes should stop spouting pro-industry propaganda and take a look at the wealth of research showing the health problems that he so hotly denies. Perhaps then he'll deserve the title he writes under.

Grahame Blackwell

--------

This is a copy of my letter to the Times.

Vee


Dear Editor

Your health editor Nigel Hawkes is correct when he states it is not possible to prove anything in life to be totally safe. However is Mr. Hawkes not aware of the growing evidence that WiFi, mobile phone masts and wirefree telephones are causing many people serious health problems? Does he seriously believe that a Government inquiry paid for by the industry itself will give us the truth on this matter? Come on Mr. Hawkes wake up and smell the coffee or at least the sizzling of fried brains.

Yours

--------

My letter to The Times today:

Dear Editor,

Nigel Hawkes has let The Times down with his biased evidence-free piece on mobiles phones.

A few points.

1) Linking the ionizing radiation of the nuclear tests of the 50s with mast radiation is fallacious for one thing. His denial of any ionizing radiation effects is another. Many eminent scientists disagree. Your readers should be told. For more see https://www.llrc.org .

2) Hardly a shred of worthwhile evidence to back up campaigners claims? There are mountains of the stuff.

Take the Washington-based Wireless Technology Research programme of 1993 chaired by George Carlo. It ran over five and a half years; it comprised of 56 studies, including in vivo and in vitro studies, provocation studies and epidemiological studies. It was supervised independently by the Harvard School of Public Health, with several layers of peer review built in.

It found the following biological effects at sub-thermal levels of exposure:

Opening of the blood-brain barrier with subsequent leakage of large albumin molecules into the brain leading to:

Formation of micronuclei, an indication for the triggering of cancer

Disruption of DNA function, including negative impact on DNA repair mechanisms (found at SAR values of 0.7 W/kg, i.e. less than half of what is allowed by the ICNIRP guidelines)

Higher cancer mortality (although people had only been using phones for circa 5 years)

More than twice the risk of neural epithelial tumours (beginning outside, inward growing)

Significant increase of acoustic neuroma (a benign tumour of the auditory nerve) after 6 years of use.

Significant correlations between the side of the head where the phone was held and the location of tumours

3) And yes the WTR’s findings were confirmed in 2005.

Step forward the REFLEX Project, a 4-year EU-backed study by twelve partners in seven countries. Their results confirmed the likelihood of long-term genetic damage in the blood and brains of users of mobile phones and other sources of electromagnetic fields. This project concluded that in-vitro damage is real and that it is important to carry out much more research, especially monitoring the long-term health of people. Several other independent labs participating in the programme replicated each other’s findings.

4) If we followed our own logic Hawkes says campaigners should be concerned about Radar installations, TV transmitters and cordless phones. Actually we are.

Unfortunately for him and us there is a vast body of occupational studies, some as long term as 20 years, from the ex-USSR and Russia, proving beyond doubt, the existence of microwave sickness as a result of exposure to Radar. The pathology of microwave sickness is in fact the same as the symptoms experienced by a small but significant number of individuals following exposure to DECT phones, Wi-Fi and mobile phones and their transmitters. 878 of these studies have been reviewed in 1996 by Prof Em. Dr Med Karl Hecht, on behalf of the German Federal Office for Telecommunication (German equivalent of OFCOM). We won’t hold our breath for Mr Hawkes to review this evidence or that of Professor Olle Johannsson (Karolinska Institute of Sweden) who found significant statistical correlations between morbidity rate of cancer in various countries to the introduction of new band of radio and TV transmission in every case.

5) Shouldn’t we be worried about Wi-Fi? Well actually campaigners are.

Wi-Fi access points have very high emissions. They are usually in the room where people work at their computers, whereas mobile phone transmitters, which do have a stronger output, will be further away. Obvious stuff but not to Mr Hawkes.

6) What about another industry-funded inquiry which Hawkes mockingly proposes?

Protestors welcome inquiries but not of the usual kind. Industry currently funds much research and just as the tobacco industry used to do for decades, tends on the whole (with notable but quickly suppressed exceptions) not to find any negative outcomes for its products. That’s its point. Is anybody surprised that truly independent research on these topics is rare and struggles for funding? Negative impacts research doesn’t also benefit from the kind of funds supporting lobbying and PR-campaigns from the industry and which appear to have worked their magic on Nigel Hawkes. But the research is out there (loads more than I’ve mentioned here, see also under https://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/heseuk/science.php ) and should be properly reported.

Times readers deserve better than this.


Andrea Klein



Letters to the Editor

The Times

November 22, 2006

Wireless networks may not be worth the headache

Sir, The attitude of your health editor on wireless networking in schools
("Health fears lead schools to dismantle wireless networks", Nov 20) beggars belief.

Wi-fi makes some people feel very ill indeed. I am one of them. I felt ill the day we installed wi-fi in our house and better the moment we went back to cable. I feel dizzy, confused and sick the moment I walk into offices, hotels and shops with wi-fi.

We should not be flooding Milton Keynes, Norwich and areas of London with this cloud of poison under the auspices of allowing everybody access to the internet. And we should not be bowing to the telecoms industry when we have absolutely no certainty on the long-term health effects.

KATE FIGES
London N16

[ Wireless technology made me sick
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/2975957/ ]



Sir, I would echo the opinion of Nigel Hawkes: the basis of any health issues arising from wi-fi signals is extremely dubious.

Much more apparent, however, are the benefits wireless networks can bring to educational institutions at every level. Wireless networks are significantly cheaper to implement than cabled ones in most environments, and allow a degree of mobility and flexibility that support new applications, from laptops in laboratories, gym environments and even outdoors, where cabling is unsuitable.

One sixth-form college in the North of England uses wireless connectivity to maximise the provision of study space, taking it beyond the traditional classroom setting. Staff and students there have the freedom to work from anywhere on campus.

Schools may choose to take a ³precautionary² approach, but must weigh the unsubstantiated risks of wi-fi radiation against the very real benefits of wireless education.

DAVID CRITCHLEY, Director, Public Sector, Cisco Systems UK



Sir, All wi-fi networks in schools should be immediately replaced by wired systems.

Many people are becoming electrosensitive as a result of constant exposure to the high-frequency electromagnetic fields created by mobile phone transmitters, DECT, BlueTooth, WLAN and wi-fi.

When subjected to these I develop symptoms, including severe headaches, pain in both breasts, tingling and itching skin and twitching of the eyelid. These symptoms go away when I am no longer exposed to these fields and so I now spend as little time as possible in ³wi-fi enabled² towns and cannot attend evening courses at the local college or university.

What is the constant exposure to wi-fi at school doing to the health and behaviour of children and teenagers? The Government wants universal mobile telecommunications systems coverage of the country and wi-fi access to homes while virtually anyone can install a system in their home that will also penetrate into the home of their neighbours.

M. WHITE,
Preston, Lancs



Sir, It is quite ironic that urgent action is being taken to limit the targeting of our children by commercial enterprises such as the junk food industry, while we happily negate any benefit from these measures with another risk, potentially much more harmful.

Our young people are, in many cases, being exposed to high levels of electromagnetic radiation 24/7. Independent scientific studies have shown that such exposure, as well as posing a health risk, can have a detrimental impact on the mood, behaviour and mental state. Alasdair Phillips, director of Powerwatch, has written a comprehensive letter advising schools to use wired networking, and the director of public health for Salzburg, Dr Gerd Oberfeld, has written an open letter of warning on the subject.

CLLR SYLVIA WRIGHT
Essington, Staffs

--------

Mobile phones tumour risk to young children
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/469215/

--------

MP calls for ban on wiFi in schools

https://tinyurl.com/y3r6t6

Western Mail

21st November 2006

WIRELESS computer networks should be banned from the nation's classrooms because of fears about their effects on health, it was claimed last night.

Adam Price MP said Wales should follow the lead of Canada, where schools no longer used microwave signals to link computer terminals and laptops.

He has backed one school in his Carmarthenshire constituency which has removed the technology. Parents with children at Ysgol Pantycelyn, Llandovery, warn there is not enough awareness about the possible dangers.

Although exact numbers are unclear, increasing numbers of schools have been installing transmitters in classrooms, which allow pupils to have wireless access to the faculty's computer network, email and the internet.

But there are concerns the microwave radiation coming from the transmitters, as with mobile phone masts, could be harmful, especially to younger children.

Some symptoms reported include loss of concentration, headaches, fatigue, memory and behavioural problems and there are even worries over cancer in the longer term.

Some experts believe children are more vulnerable to the radiation because of their thinner skulls and the fact their brains and nervous systems are still developing.

Mr Price said, "The science isn't clear, but it comes down to the precautionary principle, especially with children, because they're still in development.

"The long-term effect is not known because it's still fairly new, which is why the technology has been banned in schools in Canada."

He said he would back a similar ban in Wales, adding, "I don't think it's just a media-driven health fear or panic. There's a basis to have a look at more studies."

The technology in Ysgol Pantycelyn was quickly switched off after pressure from parents made it clear there was a great deal of unease over the possible health effects of the wi-fi terminals.

Hywel Pugh, headmaster of the school, said, "The whole school was hard-wired anyway, but one or two areas were causing us a bit of concern, so we put in the wi-fi connections over a trial period.

"But it raised concerns among parents. Some were worried it could have an effect on younger children. We listened to the concerns and then decided to find other ways to get around the problem.

"Wi-fi wasn't essential, so we decided to switch it off as a precautionary measure.

"We'd have a review of that policy if we ever had a situation where wi-fi became essential, but would not go ahead without consulting parents."

The school had already banned mobile phones from being used by children, although Mr Pugh said that measure was for reasons of discipline, rather than health.

Judith Davies, who has a 15-year-old daughter going to the school, said, "There's a lot of parents who don't know about the risks involved with this technology.

"There have been outcries over mobile phone masts even near schools, but this technology gives out the same kind of radiation, and it's inside the school. It's at least as serious, if not more serious.

"You can switch off wi-fi at home if it's making you feel unwell, but it's more of a problem in a school. There's no reason for it to be in schools where there is already cable."

A recent report by Professor Sir William Stewart, who chairs the Health Protection Agency, said evidence of potentially harmful effects of microwave radiation had become more persuasive over the past five years. It advised a precautionary approach, although conceded there was a lack of hard evidence of health damage.

Carmarthenshire County Council said it was up to individual schools' governing bodies to decide whether to use wi-fi.



The Times
November 25th 2006
News in Brief

MP calls for inquiry into risks of wi-fi

A Labour MP and distinguished cancer specialist called for a government inquiry into the potential health risks of wireless computer networks after The Times revealed that some schools were dismantling their equipment amid fears that it could be dangerous (Joanna Bale writes).

Ian Gibson, a former chairman of the Commons Science and Technology Committee, said: ³We need a departmental inquiry into this situation. The Department of Health should be looking into it seriously. What we really need is another inquiry like the Stewart report into mobile phone masts.²

Dr Gibson is an honorary Professor and former Dean of the School of Biological Sciences at the University of East Anglia.

https://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2470828,00.html

--------

Fear compels schools to shut down WiFi

Schools across the country have begun removing their wireless computer networks amid fears the new technology could pose a health risk to children.

Parents and teachers claim low levels of microwave radiation emitted from the transmitters may be damaging pupils, potentially even causing cancer in the long term.

Scientific evidence is inconclusive but some researchers say children face a greater health risk because of their thinner skulls and developing nervous system.

According to The Times, which spoke to a handful of schools replacing wireless systems with their cabled predecessors, parents and head-teachers are opting for a precautionary approach.

One concerned mother reportedly said: “Many people campaign against mobile phone masts near schools but there is a great deal of ignorance about wireless computer networks.

“Yet they are like having a phone mast in the classroom and the transmitters are placed very close to the children.”

One school dismantling its wireless network said local authorities told them the technology was safe to use, but it insisted the long-term effects were still unknown.

“We listened to the parents’ views and they were obviously very concerned,” said Tim Cannell, headteacher at Prebendal School, in Chichester, West Sussex.

“We had been having problems with the reliability of it anyway, so we decided to exchange it for a conventional cabled system.”

Responding to the paper’s investigation, Michael Bevington, a former classics teacher, said he was in no doubt as to the impact of the transmitters.

“I felt a steadily widening range of unpleasant effects whenever I was in the classroom.

“First came a thick headache, then pains throughout the body, sudden flush, pressure behind the eyes, sudden skin pains and burning sensations, along with bouts of nausea.”

The Health Protection Agency says evidence of the health risk posed by wireless technology has become more persuasive in the past five years.

Their enquiry found that in light of the absence of any evidence showing the technology damages health, a precautionary approach should be taken.

Nov 21, 2006

All content © Contractor UK Limited

https://www.contractoruk.com/news/002961.html

--------

Schools panic over WiFi

Crumbs >> RichardThurston's Blog at ZDNet UK Community

For those interested, here is my response (when it gets published!):


Hi Richard,

It is interesting that you claim that these parents are uninformed when you don't actually know how informed or otherwise they are. There is plenty of evidence to support that there may well be risks from mobile phones and from phone masts. I agree that there is almost no research (in fact, I have yet to find any published papers at all) on Wireless networks and health, however they are very similar to base stations in a number of ways (signal type, signal frequency, pulsing nature of signal etc..). FM radio waves used for TV and Radio are very different in a number of potentially important ways, and cramming the technologies all into the same box is both scientifically poor form and slightly ignorant.

I'm not trying to jump on the "alternative, scare-mongering" bandwagon here, as no doubt you are probably thinking. I am keeping my personal opinions close to myself at this stage, but to be honest the tone of your article irritates me just as much as the uninformed public crying risk at things they do not understand - It is equally uninformed, equally unbalanced and equally without merit as an argument. I accept that you have a responsibility to explore the relative merits of technology, but that does not mean that you, because of lack of research on your part, should be ridiculing a whole (albeit small) subset of population that believes there to be a risk, especially as there have not been any papers to date to confirm or undermine their fears in wireless networks.

The truth of the matter is the jury is still out on these technologies - no-one knows whether they are harmful or not. From a mechanism point of view there is almost nothing suggesting how harm could be happening based on these microwave transmissions. From an epidemiological point of view there is steadily growing evidence that both phones and masts are a risk, and this is steadily being backed up by some fairly strong lab work (albeit at higher power than typical base station exposure -- not higher than normal mobile phone exposure however). In a classroom of wireless enabled laptops accessing a wireless network, the signal strength in the data pulses is in the order of several volts per metre and usually higher than living close to a cellular phone basestation.

I suspect harm will not be admitted until the mechanism of action is known, but just because it isn't known doesn't necessary mean that the effect is not real, especially when it appears to be being replicated.

Perhaps the aim here shouldn't be to "change people's minds" so much as what to see what the truth is first?

Best Regards, - Graham Philips

PS Here is a list of some recent research papers that support my points if you are interested in some further reading, with the PubMed IDs so you can quickly find them on there ...

17045516 - Panagopoulos DJ et al - Mutation Research - October 2006 Fruit flies exposed to GSM 900 MHz and DCS 1800 MHz from common digital phones had a large decrease in oviposition due to degeneration of large large numbers of egg chambers after DNA fragmentation of their consitituent cells. This is a mechanism where the radiation appears to be causing cause actual DNA damage.

16962663 - Abdel-Rassoul G et al - Neurotoxicology - August 2006 Found headaches, memory changes, dizziness and tremors to be significantly higher among people living near base stations than controls, and gave significantly lower performance in one of their attention / memory tests. Both results were statistically significant.

16878295 - Nylund R and Leszczynski D - Proteomics - September 2006 Again, a lab experiment that found gene and protein expression changes from exposure to mobile phone radiation, but with different lines reacting differently, suggesting that cell response may be dependent on genome and proteome content - this could go some way to explaining why different people react differently.

17034627 - Hardell L et al - World Journal of Surgical Oncology - October
2006 Statistically significant increased risk was found for all brain tumours from mobile phone usage, mainly acoustic neuroma and malignant brain tumours. Odds Ratio increased with latency period, especially for astrocytoma grade III-IV.

16954120 - Yurekli AI et al - Electromagnetic biology and medicine - 2006 Highly significant (p < 0.0001) increases in oxidative stress was found in labatory rats from exposure to simulated base station radiation at levels far below guideline levels (converted SAR value 0.011 W/kg - far below most phones).


- Graham Philips
Powerwatch UK



It appears the author of the previous ZDNet article has changed his tone and quite possibly his viewpoint on the issue.

Followup blog entry: https://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10004578o-2000331766b,00.htm
https://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10004574o-2000331766b,00.htm#comment20082978

For those that didn't read the original (and all the subsequent discussion): https://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10004574o-2000331766b,00.htm

Best Regards,

- Graham Philips
Powerwatch UK

--------

Health Fears Lead British Schools to Dismantle Wi-Fi Networks
https://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231145,00.html

See all stories on this topic:
https://tinyurl.com/32m9s4

--------

Some British schools dismantle Wi-Fi over health fears
https://www.arnnet.com.au/pp.php?id=1825755070&fp=4&fpid=56736


Informant: Mark G.

--------

EMF-EMR-related toxicity
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/2981671/

--------

Health risks of Wi-Fi and WLAN on our health
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1122031/

EMF/EMR from Wireless Networks can lower Melatonin
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3482006/

Wi-Fi fears for school children
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/2978779/

WLAN, DECT in Schools and Kindergardens
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1579030/

WLAN Sickness: Rubbish or Reasonable?
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1692101/

Swedes hit hard by WiMAX waves
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/2163464/

WiMAX could fry your brain
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/2974443/

School sued for installing a wireless computer network
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1121957/

LIBRARY DIRECTOR RESIGNS BECAUSE OF WIFI
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/3194530/

Teachers want wi-fi risk research
UK teachers union calls for Wi-Fi research
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6583213.stm



https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=wireless+networks
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=wireless+networks
https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=wi-fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=wi-fi
https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Fred+Gilbert
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Fred+Gilbert

Magnetic fields in cars

Sarah - Sorry to come in late on this one (as usual), but I must relate my unpleasant - and costly - experience with a Vauxhall Vectra car. We purchased a 5 month old car about 3 years ago. I immediately started to feel ill in the front passenger seat but did not apply my mind to it for a few weeks. However, while using the accousticom to test an area I was travelling through, it was going absolutely berserk!! I suspended a piece of Powerwatch nickel material from the dashboard to try to limit my exposure until we could sort out the problem. I was in the driving seat one day, having left the nickel material in place, and suffered a terrible spasm in my left side (rather like a very severe stitch). It took my breath away but, fortunately, I was able to park the car safely and turn off the engine. After about a minute or so the pain subsided.

To cut a long story short (or this will rival War & Peace), after numerous phone calls to Vauxhall, we took the car into a local dealership where it was pored over by several mechanics and staff. The accousticom showed that emissions were detected in some Vectra's, but not others. Finally, after checking with the factory, comparing chassis numbers, it was concluded that our car had been customised to accommodate a child's car seat. The sensor was "looking" for the car seat in order to disable the air bag. However, the whole car was being bombarded by pulsed microwave radiation whenever the car seat was not in place - which was whenever we turned on the engine in our case.

The outcome of this fiasco was that we traded the car in after a few months - at a loss to us of £1,500 as Vauxhall would not accept any responsibility.

I just wonder how many accidents are being caused by this problem. Neither ROSPA nor Top Gear were interested in my rantings.

Sylvia

Freitag, 10. November 2006

Ban mobiles in schools

28 July 2000

Daily Telegraph
(c) 2000 Nationwide News Proprietary Ltd

EDUCATION Secretary David Blunkett has written to every school in Britain urging them to ban children under 16 using mobile phones except in emergencies. Mr Blunkett has sent guidelines warning of the potential health risks posed by mobile phones to pupils, particularly younger ones.

The advice follows a far-reaching inquiry led by former government chief scientist Sir William Stewart, which concluded that children could be more vulnerable to the effects of microwave radiation, which are unrecognised at the moment.

While he did not find conclusive evidence that mobile phones were harmful, Sir William said more research was needed to be sure and urged a "precautionary principle" in the meantime.

He said that youngsters under 16 might be more vulnerable to this radiation because they have thinner skulls and nervous systems that are still developing.

Mobile phones, increasingly a "must-have" accessory for many fashion-minded teenagers, have already been banned from many classrooms after teachers were interrupted by their ringing and pupils spent more time writing text mes-sages than essays.

Now teachers have been told to make sure pupils under 16 only use them in a crisis.

A spokesman for the Department of Education said: "Whether or not schools allow mobiles is up to them.

"What we are saying is that children aged 15 or under should only use them in emergencies.

"They certainly should not be using their mobiles all the time, and when they do it should only be for as short a time as possible.

"Children under 16 have thinner skulls and therefore need to be much more careful.

"We don't yet know the effects of mobile phones, which have only been around for five years, so we are suggesting that caution is used."

The guidance letter will be followed next month by a leaflet drawn up by the Department of Health summarising Sir William's advice.

Ministers want all mobile phone retailers to display the warning information at the point of sale and are also discussing plans to send them out with bills to reach as many customers as possible.

In his report in May, Sir William advised that the younger the children, the less time they should spend on mobiles.

The inquiry followed reports that radiation from mobiles could trigger cancer, memory loss and Alzheimer's disease.



The Sun, UK Press, November 2003

TEACHERS have been ordered to ban their pupils from using their mobile phones amid rising safety fears. UK Education secretary David Blunkett has taken the unusual step of writing to ALL schools in England and Wales. Mr Blunkett said mobile phones should only be used by pupils under
16 in EMERGENCIES.

A spokesman for Mr Blunkett said: "We felt we had to issue guidance on the widespread use of mobile phones in schools. The department of Health is taking the lead but we have a responsibility where pupils are concerned. We felt we had to get the message across that the non-essential use of mobile phones should be discouraged."

Mr Blunkett's order to schools follows an investigation led by ex-Government chief scientist Sir William Stewart earlier this year. He warned that children could be susceptible to damage from radiation because their immune system is not fully developed. He also pointed out that the younger the child, the more years they could be exposed to radiation.

The report backed claims that minor health complaints like headaches, earaches and skin problems may be linked to mobiles.

https://www.safewireless.org/SWIMemberContent/WiFi/tabid/190/ctl/ArticleView/mid/466/articleId/9/UK-Gov-Bans-Cell-Phones-in-All-Schools.aspx


Also this in April 2001:

JESSICA BERRY; FIONA WINGETT
15 April 2001
The Mail on Sunday

(c) 2001 Associated Newspapers. All rights reserved

A WARNING by the Department of Health about the dangers for children using mobile phones was watered down after pressure from the Department of Trade and Industry.

Insiders say the trade department was worried that it would scare parents and damage the multibillion-pound telecommunications industry.

It has also emerged that a DTI official dealing with the advice was working out his notice before moving to mobiles giant Vodafone.

Nick Williams is understood to have told bosses of the potential conflict of interest but was ordered to continue his work.

The revelation comes two weeks after MPs urged the Government to toughen up the planning restrictions on mobile phone masts.

Under-18s now account for up to a quarter of Britain's 28 million mobile users and are the market's biggest growth area. Much advertising is targeted at youngsters.

While there is no proof mobiles are bad for health, there is a genuine fear of as yet unrecognised hazards because of the gaps in scientific knowledge.

Now scientists fear the Government may be putting children at risk by understating the potential dangers.

Last year's Stewart Report concluded the risks to those under 16 would be particularly grave because of their 'developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the head and a longer lifetime of exposure'.

Later the DoH drew up a leaflet containing advice from the Chief Medical Officer. This recommended that under-16s should not use mobiles at all but gave guidelines for minimising the risk if they had to. Millions of copies of the leaflet, Mobile Phones And Health, were printed and were due to be sent to every household.

Education Secretary David Blunkett was so concerned he wrote to every school, urging them to ban under-16s from using mobiles except in emergencies. By the time the leaflet was published in December, however, the warning had been toned down.

It simply restricts itself to advising how mobiles should be used, saying calls should be kept short and that the phone should be used for essential purposes only.

It adds: 'Young people should make their own informed choices about the use of mobile phones.' Instead of being sent directly to homes, the leaflet was available only in shops, which were required to stock it but not display it.

Scientist Dr Roger Coghill, who in 1999 lost a legal bid to force the Government to put health warnings on mobiles, said the warning is too weak.

'It is so disappointing,' he said. 'We have discovered scientific evidence to show that there are problems with using a mobile close to the head for more than five minutes at a time. It is especially worrying for children.'

Whitehall sources confirmed there had been a 'big battle' between the DoH and both the DTI and No 10 over the wording.

A DTI source said the DoH was scared of repeating the mistakes it made with BSE and, in its determination to be cautious, had gone 'way beyond what the Stewart Report said'. He added: 'It would have scared many parents and that would have been unfair to the industry.' Nick Williams, who was responsible for mobile phones policy at the DTI, was serving out his notice when he contacted the DoH to ask it to change the wording.

He took up his job as a public policy executive with Vodafone in March after a three-month 'cooling-off' period required by Cabinet Office rules. These prevent civil servants who move to industry from abusing their positions.

Bosses knew of the potential conflict of interest but told him to carry on because there was no one else to deal with the matter.

A friend insisted Williams was not responsible for the final version of the leaflet. He admitted Williams had contacted the DoH by email over his concerns but claimed it did not reply.

Last night Norman Baker MP, the Lib Dems' consumer affairs spokesman, asked why he had to continue working on a matter crucial to his future employer in view of the possible conflict of interest.

He said: 'In any power struggle it is clear the DoH loses out to the DTI.

Money comes first and children's health somewhere thereafter.' The DTI would not comment on Williams's involvement with the leaflet, claiming confidentiality.

The DoH claimed the changes were minor. It said: 'There was a lot of discussion between officials and Ministers but that's not the same as saying some departments pressured other departments.'

--------

TEACHERS have been ordered to ban their pupils from using their mobile phones amid rising safety fears
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/2903032/

Children and mobile phones
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1063256/

Dienstag, 7. November 2006

TEACHERS have been ordered to ban their pupils from using their mobile phones amid rising safety fears

The Sun, UK Press, November 2003

TEACHERS have been ordered to ban their pupils from using their mobile phones amid rising safety fears. UK Education secretary David Blunkett has taken the unusual step of writing to ALL schools in England and Wales. Mr Blunkett said mobile phones should only be used by pupils under 16 in EMERGENCIES.

A spokesman for Mr Blunkett said: "We felt we had to issue guidance on the widespread use of mobile phones in schools. The department of Health is taking the lead but we have a responsibility where pupils are concerned. We felt we had to get the message across that the non-essential use of mobile phones should be discouraged."

Mr Blunkett's order to schools follows an investigation led by ex-Government chief scientist Sir William Stewart earlier this year. He warned that children could be susceptible to damage from radiation because their immune system is not fully developed. He also pointed out that the younger the child, the more years they could be exposed to radiation.

The report backed claims that minor health complaints like headaches, earaches and skin problems may be linked to mobiles.

https://www.safewireless.org/SWIMemberContent/WiFi/tabid/190/ctl/ArticleView/mid/466/articleId/9/UK-Gov-Bans-Cell-Phones-in-All-Schools.aspx

--------

Ban mobiles in schools
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/2919136/

Children and mobile phones
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/1063256/

Montag, 6. November 2006

RADIATION RISK ON THE ROOF

https://tinyurl.com/yk9vtm
https://tinyurl.com/ydtexn

Help required folks. Please see this story "RADIATION RISK ON THE ROOF" in Saturday's (4.11.06) Bristol Evening Post about ill health and cancer clusters in a block of flats:

https://tinyurl.com/yk9vtm

Just to get you interested/annoyed the Orange spokes person said, "It is interesting that the residents believe if the mast is gone they will be free of radiation but this will not be the case. In fact, a 90- second phone call on a mobile is the equivalent in exposure terms to standing in front of a mast for a full 24 hours without moving.

"We are obviously sensitive to the fact that some people who live there have health problems, but there is no evidence to suggest the phone masts are in any way a cause of their various illnesses." Would like the Bristol Evening Post to be flooded with letters if possible (well 2 or 3 at least). It is only me who ever responds to such stories in the BEP so it would be great if a few of you could also write. You can email your letter marked "for publication" to 'epletters@bepp.co.uk' or write to Readers Letters, Bristol Evening Post, Temple Way, Bristol, BS99 7HD. (The usual 250 word limit is given but I have got away with 295 in the past)!


Thanks for your help,

John Elliott

--------

How can 90 seconds on a mobile phone be the equivilent to standing in front of a mast for 24 hours ?????????????????

I just don't get it !!

A mast near me that it proposed has a rating of 100 Watts of output power. What is the output power of a mobile phone ? Does anyone know ? I'm sure I read somewhere that its a few Watts, so its doesn't seem comparable....

Anyone know what Orange might be talking about here ?????

Chris.

--------

Bristol Cancer Cluster in Flats (Vodaphone and Orange Masts on Roof)

I've heard this one before too.

With a mast, the power output is high (100W) but you're tens of metres from it. With a phone, the power output is low (a few Watts), but you're only millimetres from it. The amount of energy you absorb is dependent on:

1. the power output

2. how far away you are

3. how long you are exposed So someone's done the maths and worked out you absorb the same energy in a 90 second call compared to 24 hours at some distance from a mast. I can believe this...

BUT

2 things to note.

Firstly, it's making a huge assumption about the mechanics of any harmful effect. Is harm simply dependent on the amount of energy absorbed? Perhaps prolonged exposure causes more damage than short bursts, in which case a mast on your roof would be more dangerous? Or perhaps it's the other way round - maybe we're immune below a certain threshold, above which damage starts being caused, in which case a mast would be less dangerous than a phone. Without identifying the actual mechanism, you simply can't say. So for Orange to imply the risks are the same is flawed logic. But it gets them a good soundbite...

Secondly, government guidelines clearly recommend children should only use mobile phones in an emergency. This means even a 90 second call is too much. If they're happy to admit that 24 hours near a mast is the same as 90 seconds on the phone, then there's a clear contradiction allowing masts on top of houses where children might live.


Ben

--------

----- Original Message -----
From: Dr Grahame Blackwell
To: epletters@bepp.co.uk
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:21 PM
Subject: for publication

Dear Editor

[I understand that you have a 250-word limit. If you have to cut this letter, please take those sections that you consider of most concern to your readership. Thanks]

I'm writing in response to your article 'Radiation Risk on the Roof' (Evening Post, 4th Nov). I find it particularly arrogant of the Orange spokesperson to assert that 90 seconds on a mobile is equivalent to 24 hours in front of a mast. She's clearly not up to speed on research showing that the body's recovery processes which restore balance to one's system quite quickly after such a short call have absolutely NO chance of maintaining such balance under a 24-hour exposure, even at far lower signal strength - there's just no respite for those in the radiation field of a mast 24/7. She also shouldn't be making such wild claims without acquainting herself with replicated research findings showing significant reduction in melatonin production - essential for both sleep regulation and as an anti-cancer agent - for those exposed to such emissions for extended periods at night, as people living near to a mast are. It's no coincidence that both sleep disorders and incidence of a variety of cancers are significantly higher in the vicinity of masts according to a number of studies.

Those conversant with the weight of evidence showing health risks from mast emissions can only give a hollow laugh at the 'reassurance' that the NRPB are monitoring the situation - remember the confident claims of government departments over BSE? As for the BMA claim that there's evidence that they're perfectly safe, that just doesn't make sense. The only evidence possible from research studies is on whether or not specific effects have been observed to a significant degree - to be 'perfectly safe', EVERY possible effects would have to have been tested for, a logical impossibility.

On the contrary, the EU-funded 'Reflex' study, conducted over a period of more than four years by twelve partner institutions from seven countries, concluded that in respect of radiation as emitted from both phones and masts "... there exists no justification any more to claim, that we are not aware of any pathophysiological mechanisms which could be the basis for the development of functional disturbances and any kind of chronic diseases in animal and man." In other words the claim that there's no way that this type of radiation could cause illness no longer holds water. This followed results replicated by a number of the partner institutions showing single and double-strand DNA breaks of the sort that lead to cancer at levels of radiation within our government's 'safety guidelines'.

Come off it Vodafone and Orange. The future may be bright for mobile phone operators under the government's 'Fire away, that's OK' policy, but the cancer clusters in the main beams of masts across the world speak far more eloquently than any ill-informed vested-interest spokesperson for those who gain big bucks while others suffer.

Sincerely

Dr Grahame Blackwell
Lustleigh
Devon

--------

Bristol Cancer Cluster in Flats (Vodaphone and Orange Mast)

Your article of 4th November 2006, “Radiation on the Roof”, moved me so much that I felt compelled to write despite the fact that I am trying to recover after an enforced move from my home where TETRA, 2G and 3G emissions penetrate most areas of my flat and made me quite unwell.

Berkley House is yet another example of the increasing clusters of ill-health across the UK attributed to all technologies using pulsed microwave radiation which includes mobile phone masts, TETRA etc

As the founder member of Mast Sickness UK, I know of many such sites with masts on the roofs of residential flats, offices, industrial units, hospitals, schools and churches. There are also clusters of antennae on sports grounds and in residential areas across the UK. All those I have heard of are also associated with clusters of ill- health, many with higher than average cancer rates which are regarded by authorities as anecdotal evidence.

The scientific proof of harm has been presented to various bodies countless times but it remains discredited or ignored by those with the power to change things, yet the incidents of “anecdotal evidence” keep rising at an alarming rate.

I speak to many people who are unwell around this technology and they have worked out by trial and error over a period of time what is actually making them ill, many after undergoing various medical tests. None wished to blame this new technology which liberates us and gives us so much pleasure but many now have to avoid it, if they can, and cannot use it! There is a growing number of people who have become sensitive to pulsed microwave radiation, just as some are sensitive to electrical frequencies, or others to chemicals, pollen etc.

The wisps of this man-made smog are now becoming a multi –layered blanket of pollution of a new kind that we cannot see and only those who are sensitive to it can feel. Where there is smoke we should look for the fire before it becomes an unquenchable inferno.

All these poor people in Berkeley House, or any others affected, can do is to seek some form of protection or ask their MP to lobby the Government about this growing problem.

I can advise on where protection can be obtained or help in other simple ways.

My email address is MastSicknessUK @aol.com

Sandi Lawrence
Mast Sickness UK

--------

PHONE MAST PLAN FOR HOSPITAL
https://www.louthleader.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=817&ArticleID=1862823

--------

https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=cancer+clusters

Base Stations, operating within strict national and international Guidelines, do not present a Health Risk?
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/771911

Dienstag, 31. Oktober 2006

B L A C K O U T L O N D O N 4th November 2006

Starting at Sunset - 4.30 pm to 7.30 pm

You are invited to take part in the largest demonstration of People Power that London (and the UK?) has ever seen on Saturday 4th November 2006, by turning off all your lights, and switching off all your non-essential electrical equipment at Sunset.

REMEMBER, REMEMBER, THE FOURTH OF NOVEMBER ! For one day in November, we are asking everyone who receives this message to think about what they can turn off, switch off and unplug, to show support. We want the power demand in the United Kingdom to reduce so much that the newspapers are obliged to report it. >> We want the lights to go out in London, so that on the evening of 4th November 2006, the dimming effect will be visible from space.

To protect us from the Enemy of Climate Change, we need a War on Energy Abuse. Just like Britain during World War Two, we need to see a Blackout all over London.

CELEBRATE THE NIGHT OF POWER: TURN OFF ! SWITCH OFF ! UNPLUG !

If you are a security guard for an office block in London, please ask your employers when you should be turning the lights out. If you are a church warden, please check with your church council to see if they agree to switching off the floodlights. If you are working for your local Council, ask if you can help them implement an energy reduction plan to turn off lights, computers and fans at the weekend. If you are at home, switch off your set-top boxes, pull all the chargers out of the wall sockets, turn off lights in any room you are not using, switch off any machine with a digital clock in it, unplug the hi-fi and the TV and the games console, de-frost your freezer, switch off your fridge for a couple of hours. Turn the central heating thermostat down to 16 degrees and put a woolly sweater/jumper on if you're cold.

POWER CUT

Blackout London is being called by the same group that organised the Power Cut on 31st August 2006, and is being promoted by workface.
https://www.workface-limited.co.uk/html/powercut.html

--------

We should probably try to suggest switching off the mobile networks - some time ago someone said 3G when live would raise the mast network to 4% (or something similar) of national grid energy consumption

Gary

Hospitals:"They're talking about selling space to phone companies to put up masts on the roof"

This article about a Gwent hospital is a bit worrying - it could start a trend since it goes on to say "They're talking about selling space to phone companies to put up masts on the roof." See https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/6098718.stm for the full story.

Martin
GRAM



The main hospital near me has already got numerous masts on top. The only agreement that was reached after months of protest was to move them back from the edge of the building for 'siting and appearance' sake. Perhaps hospitals should be added to the list of BT Exchanges, Colleges and Churches, who seem to have lost all rights as to what is erected on their roof spaces, and deny all responsibility for, well, anything. Or maybe I'm just being an old cynic (although I think not).

Angie

Donnerstag, 26. Oktober 2006

Anger over MP’s call

I read the David Lawley report (October 17) on Tom Watson’s statement supporting the use of mobile phones in hospital and was quite frankly disgusted. Tom Watson purports to support the sensible siting of masts and has given our campaign group - https://www.w-a-r-t.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk - help in fighting these due to the proven adverse health effects that independent research has now proved exists at even low levels of EMR, despite the Government’s refusal to acknowledge the facts. Does he not realise that patients will take longer to recover and will be more likely to get serious infections as their immune systems will be compromised, thus resulting in longer stays in hospital.

They will also suffer from sleep disorders and a reduction in melatonin levels following the installation of roof masts that would inevitably be required to cope with the extra traffic.

What will it do to the health of the hospital staff who will be constantly exposed to phone and mast emissions during their working hours?

I can just imagine what it would be like with dozens of people, especially teenagers and younger children, playing games that constantly beep and screech, constantly texting and having to listen to the inane ringtones when they get replies.

Adults chatting away at every bedside reporting to their family on the condition of their loved ones who are unknowingly gently absorbing the microwave emissions that surround them.

What about those who need peace and quiet. Has he not considered them, or has he got a hidden agenda?

I think Tom Watson should read all of the independent research that is available before promoting such a dangerous cause.

He is a local MP in Sandwell and has publicly supported our campaigns against the sitting of masts in his constituency. Was this just a vote getter? If you make more calls you need more masts.

Maybe his time would be better spent in promoting the continued use of safe land lines in hospitals at cheaper rates.

Peter Mobley,
Woden Road East, Wednesbury.

© 2006 - all rights reserved

https://www.expressandstar.co.uk/2006/10/26/anger-over-mps-call/

Mittwoch, 25. Oktober 2006

Please contribute to our community campaign web site

Our local community in Stone, Staffordshire is currently fighting to stop a mobile phone mast from being approved near our housing estate. Local residents have raised local community awareness by contacting the local press.

We have a local cricket club who have agreed to allow O2 to use their land for a new 3G lampost style mast. The mast will be a few tens of yards from some houses, and within a one mile radius there are literally hundreds of houses. The proposed plan was originally thrown out by our local Borough Council, but O2 have lodged an appeal and the case is going to the planning inspectorate in November.

I have put up a web site to act as a bit of a focus point for our campaign efforts. It has attracted quite a volume of traffic due to the local media attention and a local poster campaign. There has been some lively discussion on there amongst residents on both sides of the argument, but the general debate has started to subside.

If anyone out there has some spare time and would like to contribute anything on the forum area of the site, to perhaps educate or warn our community of the potential impact of the mast (based on their own experience & research), it might help to keep things moving along and encourage some to act if they can see some informed opinions.

The web site can be found at : https://www.stopthemast.com . The forum area is at : https://stopthemast.proboards107.com/

Thanks for any help that anyone can provide.

Chris

World-News

Independent Media Source

User Status

Du bist nicht angemeldet.

Suche

 

Aktuelle Beiträge

The Republican War on...
https://info.commondreams. org/acton/ct/33231/s-0fbd- 2106/Bct/q-003a/l-sf-lead- 0014:208ed/ct13_0/1/lu?sid =TV2%3ALcjACotbo
rudkla - 12. Jun, 05:44
With FBI Reportedly Investigating...
https://info.commondreams. org/acton/ct/33231/s-0fa0- 2106/Bct/q-003a/l-sf-lead- 0014:208ed/ct10_0/1/lu?sid =TV2%3AsishW7bVI
rudkla - 9. Jun, 05:27
Die Kampagnen gegen die...
Allmählich wird das ganze Ausmaß der politischen Attacken...
rudkla - 29. Feb, 16:27
How USDA Climate Change...
https://truthout.org/artic les/how-usda-climate-chang e-denial-threatens-the-sou th/
rudkla - 7. Jul, 05:51
Trump Wants to Create...
https://truthout.org/artic les/its-not-just-about-dep ortations-trump-wants-to-c reate-a-permanent-undercla ss/
rudkla - 7. Jul, 05:48

Archiv

April 2025
Mo
Di
Mi
Do
Fr
Sa
So
 
 1 
 2 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 6 
 7 
 8 
 9 
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Status

Online seit 7275 Tagen
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 12. Jun, 05:44

Credits


Afghanistan
Animal Protection - Tierschutz
AUFBRUCH für Bürgerrechte, Freiheit und Gesundheit
Big Brother - NWO
Britain
Canada
Care2 Connect
Chemtrails
Civil Rights - Buergerrechte - Politik
Cuts in Social Welfare - Sozialabbau
Cybermobbing
Datenschutzerklärung
Death Penalty - Todesstrafe
Depleted Uranium Poisoning (D.U.)
Disclaimer - Haftungsausschluss
EMF-EMR
... weitere
Profil
Abmelden
Weblog abonnieren
development